Professional Documents
Culture Documents
mm
THIS IS A PREPRINT -
A Study
SPE
3684
SUBJECT TO CORRECTION
of Oil Recovery
by
with the Addition
In-Situ
Combustion
of Water
By
John H. Alderman+ and J. S. Osoba, Members AIME, Texas A&M U.
@
Ameriean
Institute of Mining,
Copyright 1971
MetaIlur@cal,
and Petroleum
Engineer,
Inc.
This paper was prepared for the 42nd Annual California Regional Meeting of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers of AIME, to be held h Los Angeles, Calif., NOV. 4-5, 1%1. permission to coPY
is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words. Illustrationsmay not be copied. The
abstract should contain conspicuousacknowledgmentof where and by whom the paper is presented.
Publication elsewhere after publication in the JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM TECHNOLOGY or the SOCIETY OF
PETROLEUM ENGINEERS JOURNAL is ususlly granted upon request to the Editor of the appropriatejournal
provided agreement to give proper crehi~ is made;
Discussion of this paper is invited. Three copies of any discussion should be sent to the
Society of Petroleum Engineers office. Such discussion may be presented at the above meeting and,
with the paper, may be consideredfor publicationin one of the two SPE magazine.
ABSTRACT
The object of this work was to improve the
forward combustionprocess by injecting water
simultaneouslywith air. One of the methods
used to recover oil from underground reservoirs
that has gained interest in recent years is
in-situ combustion. This process involves
ignition of the oil in reservoir rock and the
propagation of the resultant combustion zone
toward producing wells by the injection of air.
However, at the present time this method has
enjoyed only margtial.economic success in a
limited number of applications.
Among the methods to recover oil from underground reservoirs that have gained interest in
recent years are those involving the application
of heat to the reservoir. The use of heat to
increase production rate and recovery is not new,
however. Shortly after the completion of the
Drake well in 1859, steam was used to melt paraffin from the wellbore and increase the rate of
oil production. In 1935, the Russians were conducting experimentsto recover more oil by a
To study this process, a combustiontube
process they cslled crude oil gasification. Thi:
was packed with oil, water, ssnd and clay.
work involved mowing heat outward from a well+-..-...+4
.m ~.mA
fnvemmnnv
n?
-&A ~ 4UL-UI=UAV.L
-.
Combustionwas initiated and propagated dom the --uur= MUU
.u was ~~~ ...WM..
tube by the injection of air. In three runs
an oil-recoverymechanism known today as in-situ
water was injected with the air to study its
combustion.
effect. The produced gas and liquids were
measured and analyzed. The temperature and rate
In-situ combustionhas, however, met with
of advance of the combustion front were also
only marginal economic success in displacing oil
measured. Pressures at the inlet, outlet and
from reservoir rock and has found limited appli- dOH$j
~g+w~~p&
. @.e ~e~~~~ f~~ ~h~~ h~s been noor
=_
the
tiikm
were
ineasaed
thmugkmt
points
the run.
utilization of the generated heat. Most of the
heat is left in the burned portion of the reserIt was found that adding water to the
voir.
injected air effected the oil recovery. In all
One advantage gained from the application
cases where water was injected, oil recovery
of heat to a reservoir is based on reduction of
increased. The rate of oil recovery also
increased. More efficient utilization of heat
crude oil viscosity at the higher temperature.
also took place because of the movement of heat For the lower gravity oils this is a substantial
decrease.1*2 From Beals curves of viscosity
References and illustrationsat end of paper.
*Now with Shell Oil Co.
SPE 3684
.4
.<1
mn ~, ~f w~~~~ were mixed
L>u
&l
WA
U.LJ.
ad -
and carefully tamped in the combustiontube to
a height of 36 in. The thermowell had already
been placed into the tube and care was taken not
to damage or alter its vertical alignment.
During the packing, samples of the mixhre were
One field trial utilizing this process has
taken from each quarter of the pack and were
been described in detail.7-9 This was in the
later analyzed for liquid content and sand-grain
Carlyle pool of the Iola Field in Allen County, density. The mixture remaining after packing
Kan. The results of this test were encouraging. was weighed to detendne the amount of material
packed. This mixing and packing procedure was
the same for sll four runs.
The increased demand for crude oil and the
increase in the cost of finding new reserves ha:
.
.
l?!-.
ruur to 5 r~ criof raw limeed cd was
increased the need to recover more of the oii
placed on the sand face to Msure rapid and
presently being left in reservoirs. This is
uniform initial combustion.
particularlytrue in reservoirs containing oil
of low gravity where present technology has not
been successful and thermal methods such as
When all lines and flanges were in place,
steam and in-situ combustionhave enjoyed only
the thermocouplewas positioned opposite the
limited economic success. The object of this
heater and air was injected and regulated with
research was to study in the laboratory the
a differentialpressure cell to maintain the
desired air flux. After a flux of 4 cu ft/min
displacement of oil from porous media during
in-situ combustion with the injection of water. was obtained, the transformer supplying power
to the heater was adjusted to its mbum
setting.
EXPERIMENTALEQUIFMENT AND PFKXXDURES
A schematic drawing of the equipment used
in this study is shown in Fig. 1. The combustion tube was a flanged sta~ess-steel cylinde]
43 in. long and 2 in. in diameter. The wall
thickness of the tubes was 0.02-irn. This
+h+.kn...
~hosen to minimize heat loss and
..A.M.
- w==
..x--.--_-.still allow for the welding of flanges to the
tube to support a pressure differentialof 200
psi. A larger hea~-walled insulated cylinder
served as a pressure shell for the combustion
tube. Insulating material was poured into the
-I,*
---l-..-+<
-w.+T,l-.n
em,+~~~~
u=
-Au
SnnuLus DeTJw-eerl
the GullluuauLu,L
shell to further reduce heat loss from the
combustiontube.
Temperaturein the combustion tube was
measured with a thermocouplewhich could be
S!JF,
368L
at the Wet
to a minimum and then increased to
down the tube and the time and temperature of
a temperaturebetween 890F and 935F at the
the front as it reached this point were again
w,-.+
~~~
rqsztd.
thrmlghout a combustion front. The temperaturethen deALU
U-A
GU. ~.~~ py~~~~l~v~
run to permit calculationof the velocity of the creased sharply to about 300% and levelled off
for a distance of 1 to 3 fiches before deburning front. At least once each hour a comcreasing to the temperature of the original
plete traverse of the tube was made with the
pack, about 76F.
thermocouple.
In Run 2, shown in Fig. 3, the tijection
The cumulativevolume of gas passing
through the wet test meter was recorded every 15 of water was begun between the profile taken at
1.64 hours and the one at 2.18 hours. In Run 3
minutes. A sample of the produced gas was
---L-:-:.-A:-- L-----Lfi+,.,A.-.m
+Le
-..n+%la+.ba?.l
wa~~~ LILJtW1.dU1l
UC&~L
UC!#WCGAL
UiLG
~ALLLG
u-=..
anaiyzed every 6 to 10 minutes. Tne iiquids
at 1.61 hours and the one taken at 2.42 hours.
displaced from the tube were collected in
weighed bottles every 10 to 15 minutes. Water
In Run 4, Fig. 5, the heater was turned off
and oil in each sample were separated and the
density of the oil in the sample was determined after the ignition of the oil was confirmed.
Water injection was initiated between the temby means of a pycnometer.
perature profile taken at 1.60 hours and the one
The four samples of the sand taken when the taken at 2.23 hours.
combusion tube was packed were analyzed to
The burning front velocity was found to
determine the fraction of water and oil in the
. .
.
<- ~=_-_- uwr
-O*-- th
D,,m
water. Tm
*lL~Lw.
LILufease
i.i-lJ~CtiC)fi
d
mixture with a Dean-stark apparatus,witin
2 the burning front velocity was 0.508 ft~hr
tolulene used as a solvent. The samples were
before water injection and 0.562 ft/hr after
weighed before being placed in the extractor
water injection. In Runs 3 and 4 the velocity
and again after they were removed and dried.
The .v.Gy&T,
e of ~.;~and water ~m.dt~.e~Zm&&-gY~~m& increased from O..?@ and 0.51& to 0.676 and
0.609 ft/hr.
density of the samples were determined.
Gas compositiondata from the chromatographywere convertedto percent composition.
The gas compositionand liquid prcxluctiondata
were then fed to an IBM 360 computer for further
analysis, and the fuel concentration,air fuel
ratio, and percent carbon oxidized to carbon
monoxide were calculated.
In Runs 2 to.4 water was injected with the
air when the combustion front had advanced
approximately9.5 in. The procedure for
igniting the oil was the same as fn Run 1. In
Run 2, 1.0 cc/reinof water was injected and in
Run 3 the rate was increased to 4.0 cc/rein.
glLrnl@atiVe
water ~nje~ti~n was measured every
15 minutes.
SPE 3684
ture at the sand face of the inlet was maintained at about 8750F by the electric heater.
Moving down the tube from the sand face, the
temperature decreased as a result of heat loss
from the tube. This heat loss was from radiation and conduction from the tube and from
convection and conduction through the sand pack
within the tube. Approximately 5 in. from the
In Run 2 water was injected at a rate of
sand face a minimum temperaturewas reached and
1.0 cc/reinfor a cumulativeinjected volume of
the temperaturethen increased as the combustion
water of 0.28 PV. The volume of oil recovered
zone was approached. At the combustion front,
from the tube was 66.2 percent of the oil
which at this time was located 13 in. from the
originally in place. When the water injection
sand face, a maximum temperature of 9200F was
rate was increased to 4.0 cc/reinin Runs 3 snd
reached. Here heat was being liberated by the
4, the oil recovery increased to 78.2 percent
and 80.2 percent, respectively. The cumulative combustionprocess. The temperaturewas
sharply lower at 3000F~13 in. farther down the
water injected in Run 3 was 0.83 PV and in Run
tube. In this zone some oil as well as all the
4, 0.88 Pv.
water were flowing as a vapor. The oil vapor
For comparisonpurposes, the oil-production was formed from cracking and vaporizing the
data was normalized because of small differences crude. Water vapor was formed from connate
water and water formed in the combustionprocess
in the volume of oil initially present. This
After the sharp decrease in temperature,the
difference resulted from a small variation in
temperaturelevel.ledoff for about 1.5 in. and
porosity of the packed sand for each run. The
in this plateau was controlledby the phase
oil production from Runs 2 to 4 was nomnalized
behavior of the water. As the water changed
to the amount of oil packed in Run 1. Fig. 19
nrwnali
v.ed
Q~~+~o.dl~ct~on
histO~
p~esents then._A..
from a vapor to a liquid, the temperature
remained constant. In this steam zone, oil was
for the four runs.
-being removed by physicsl displacementad
by
steam distillation. After all the water conWhen water was injected the first oil was
produced at an earlier thne than when air alone densed the temperature again decreased sharply.
Water and oil in front of the steam zone were
was injected. As can be seen in Fig. 18, the
first oil production in ~
2 occurred 1.10
slowly stripped of their heat as they moved into
the colder region of the pack.
hours before it did in Run 1. In Run 3 oil
production started 0.83 hours sooner than in
Run 2* In Run 4 the oil breakthroughtime was
The temperatureprofiles for Runs 2 to 4
earlier than in Run 2, but was 0.63 hours longer in which water was injected in conjunctionwith
thanin Run3.
the air are shown in Figs. 3 to 5. The temperature profile for Run 2 at 1.64 hours was taken
Water production from the tube during Run
before water was injected and its shape and
1 was 206.2 gm. During Run 2, 451.1 gm of water characteristicsare essentiallythe same as
those in Run 1. For Runs 3 and 4 the temperawere produced, and during Run 3, 930.5 gm were
--a++ln= .fnw
~.(j~
hnllr~
~u~
~,@
~Ql~F~.
VIAL.
y..~~.
. .
---prcxiuceci.During Run & approximatelythe saiie +---respectively,were taken before water injec;ion
amount of water was injected as in Run 3, but
only 480.5 gm of water were produced. However, was initiated, and they too have the same
characteristicsas Run 1. After water injection
the water remaining in the sand snd clay in the
enmh,>.++nn
+.~lho
a+. ~~-~
~ermination Of Run 4
in Runs 2 and 3? a larger fraction of the heat
e.11=-.*..
..-..
being supplied by the electric heater was rewas found to be 483.4 gm.
moved by the water. The temperature at the sand
face in Run 2 dropped from 875% before water
The pressures and temperatures efisting
injection to 820% after water injection. In
along the length of the combustiontube are
Run 3 the temperature at the top of tinesand
shown in figs. 20 to 23. Table 1 shows the
pack dropped from 875%? to 3750F. During Run 4
maximum pressure differentialmeasured between
the heater was turned off after ignition, and
the inlet and outlet of the combustiontube,
and the time that this differentialwas measur- therefore the temperature at the sand face
ed. Also shown is the time that the pressure
declined throughout the run.
differentialreturned to the initial value.
In the runs in which water was injected,
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
a longer steam zone fomed. The plateau was
1.5 in. long in Run 1 at 2.74 hours! while in
A temperatureprofile of an in-situ combus- Run 2 it was 5.5 in. long at 2.85 hours. In
tion process in which air alone was injected is
Runs 3 and 4 the steam zone was even larger than
shown in Fig. 2. The temperatureprofile for
in Run 2. Run 3 had a steam zone 13.5 in. long
2.74 hours shows the typical zones in the
at only 2.43 hours.
combustion tube for this type run. The tempera-
SPE -.
3684
A*
U.L
al.11
UL4A~
~.~8
2.
3.
4.
5.
CONCLUSIONS
6.
From this laboratory study of the recovery
of oil from a vertical column of sand by in-situ
combustion,the following general conclusions
seem to be warranted.
1. Water vapor passing through the combustion zone increased the fraction of oil
recovered due to a lower fuel concentration
needed to support combustion. Within the rates
of injection of this study, the higher the rate
of water injection the larger the recove~.
7.
8.
9.
9
~~~e~ .J~p~~ p~~~llcg through the combusti;; zone increased the rate of oil recovery, 10.
and within the rates of injection of this study,
the higher the rate of water injection the
higher the rate of recovery.
~1
TABLE 1 - SWRY
Run
Number
13
SPE 368L
Maximum
Pressure
Differential
Psig
Time of
Maximum
Differential
Hrs.
Time Pressure
Differential
Returnedto
Original Value
Hrs.
48
3.40
6.50
28
1.90
5.30
34
2.60
4.90
39
2.00
5.70
HEATER SAND
., . .
:**
-.
?. .
.,
. .. .
Ir
WATER RES.
PllJpN
4.
1tp ?
t
I
..4.
. coMBUSTION TUBE
...
.,,
.,,
TRANSFORMER
..
,.. .
. .
.,. .
. . .
7
-H
1F
-FimiR3EL*
--bmia
FA
?
!
J PRESSURE SHELL
!U.+E
SEPARATOR +
CHROMATOGRAPHY
900
800
700
ok
6!IC
g
~
500
E
g
400
300
200
100
0
2
Oi
0
Fig. 3 -
Temperature
10
12
10
12
along
the
length
20
18
DISTANCE.
INCHES
22
18
20
DISlX17CE,
I~CHSS
22
the
tube
16
14
16
14
of
combustion
24
24
at
26
26
various
28
28
times
30
30
for
32
32
Run
~.
34
36
34
36
00
I
W- \/\/\/y\
I
1 1
\,/
700
60C
5Oc
~\
co
10
18
16
14
12
20
22
24
tube
at
26
32
30
28
34
36
DISTANCE,INCH33S
Fig.
. Temperature
along
the
10
length
12
of
the
18
16
74
combustion
20
22
various
24
26
times
28
fOr
Run 3.
30
32
34
DIsTANCE,INCHES
Fig. 5 -
Temperature
along
the
length
of
the
combustion
tube
at
v8riOUS
times
fOr
Run
J.
36
TIME, HOURS
Fig. 6 - Fuel concentrationas a function of time for Run 1.
2 .0
1 .8
m
H1 .6
~
Al .4
.2
.0
.8
.6
.4
0
.2
.0
0
TIME, HOURS
Fig.
7 -
Fuel
concentration
as
a function
of
time
for
Run
2.
2.0
1.8
(-n
~ 1.6
;
l-l
1.4
z
g 1.2
H
4
g 1.0
zl
W
u .8
z
8
.6
.4
.2
.C
)
TIME, HOURS
m
L,-
r___ . ...
TJLlllelUr
JXUI1 ~.
TIME, HOURS
Fig. 9 -
Fuel
concentration
as
a function
of
time
for
Run
j.
TIME , ifiOURS
Fig.
10
- Fraction
of
carbon
oxidized
to
carbon
monoxide
for
Run
1.
o
0
TIME,
Fig.
11
- Fraction
of
carbon
oxidized
carbon
monoxide
HOURS
to
for
Run
2.
TIME, HOURS
Fig. 12 - Fraction of carbon oxidized to carbon monoxide for Run 3.
T~E,4HOURS
Fig,
CARBON
DIOXIDE
TIME, HOURS
Fig. 14 - Produced gas compositionfor Run 1.
TIME, HOURS
Fig.
15 -
Produced
gas
composition
for
Run
2.
20
20
18
~ 16
d
o
+ 14
zg 12
e
H
w
0
&
z
08
v
10
03
46
u
4
2
0I
o
TIME , HOURS
Fig.
1(. - Produced
5,
TIME , HOURS
gas composition
for Run
3.
Fig.
17 . Produced
gas composition
for Run 4.
160,0
140.0
120.0
~
;lOO. O
~
~ 80.0
!-7
u
~ ~o+o
E-4
E 40.0
20.0
f-in
.
l-.fi
0.0
1.0
Fig.
18 -
,2.0
Cumulative
~//
Lk!#
3.0
,4
4.0
5.0
TIMIE, HOURS
oil production
for Runs
6.o
1 to b.
~.o
B*o
1.0
0.0
Fig.
19 -
2.0
4!
(I
3.0
./,
./ ,
5.C)
4.0
T~E, HOTJRS
d
,
6.0
7.0
8.o
200[
..................................................................
t
190
..
IBO
...
.. .
..
3.40 HRS
.. .
..>
4.80 IIRS
-..
.
4.10 HR8
1000
~.
1 em
----.
<K: ~f
180
150
I 40 .
0$!
460101
21416
10
20
22
Z4
26
28
30
32
34
s,
DISTANCE. INCHES
Fig. 20 - Pressure
and teqerature
distributions
during
Run 1.
200
-----190
~
H
m Iao
&
----
170HRS
-...
.
1.60 HRil
?..S5 IIR8
-..
2,00
------
MRS
--------
~~-
R
m 160
B
~
150
140 .
[~QL
024681012
16
141S
20
22
2-4
26
i?o
30
32
a4
24
DISTANCE , INCHES
Fig.
21
- Pressure
and zenperature
distributions
during
Run
2.
200
I
160
e
1.60 14RS
.. . ...- .-..:----....................... ............ . ....................
..
-;:::=
k-----..
~lm
P+
- 170
2.43 HRS
1.60 )lRs
.
. 1000
. ..
..
ok
6W
.<
;150
-------
..
{
130
024681012
. ..
2,60 MRS
. . . . . . ---------
------
coo
E~
400
2
w
200
i
m
.-
c
0
1416
16
20
22
24
26
26
30
32
34
3S
DISTANCE , INCHES
Fi&.
22 - Pressure
and temperature
distributions
during
RuI
j.
200.
.. -. . ..- . --------1so
a
~
-------
160
1.62 IIRS
la
-170
..-----
-------------
--a
1,60 M6
. . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
..
. ..
. 1000
.-~.20
------ HRS. . ..-
. . . . . . . . . . . . ---------..
. ..
Z43 Hns
--------
=$ffa---:
600 @
E
~
,30
z
~
!60
140 ~-
: :!
I 30
0
02466.10)2
14161020
22
24
26
26
30
DISTANCE . INCHES
Fig.
23 - Pressure
and temperature
distributions
during
Run h.
32
34
36